HiBC saved me a bunch of typing in post 141. I second everything he said. I was and remain against background checks of any kind.

First, they rang the death knell of a legal principle known as 'presumption of innocence'. You should not have to preemptively and repeatedly confirm your innocence to exercise a constitutional right.

Second, they are a nuisance only to the law abiding and they are a tool of infringement the second amendment prohibits.

Third, they are completely ineffective. Hardcore criminals, terrorists and (other) crazies and not going to stand around, waiting to buy a gun, while somebody runs a background check on them. They will get guns and they won't give a rat's ass if it's suddenly MORE illegal for them to obtain them.

Did you miss that? Hardcore criminals and crazies don't give a damn about ANY of your glorious laws. They laugh at them and they laugh at you for being stupid enough to think such a thing. They rejoice at any legal mechanism that inhibits their victims' ability to defend themselves.

Whose side are you on?

__________________
“Nine-tenths of tactics are certain, and taught in books: but the irrational tenth is like the kingfisher flashing across the pool, and that is the test of generals. It can only be ensured by instinct, sharpened by thought practicing the stroke so often that at the crisis it is as natural as a reflex.” ~ T. E. Lawrence